Having worked in low-level embedded systems that could be considered "system critical", it's a horrible feeling knowing what's in that code and having no actual recourse other than quitting (which I have done on few occasions because I did not want to be tied to that disaster waiting to happen).

I actually started a legal framework and got some basic bills together (mostly wording) and presented this to many of my colleagues, all agreed it was needed and loved it, and a few lawyers said the bill/framework was sound .. even had some carve-outs for "mom-n-pops" and some other "obvious" things (like allowing for a transition into it).

Why didn't I push it through? 2 reasons:

1.) I'd likely be blackballed (if not outright killed) because "the powers that be" (e.g. large corp's in software) would absolutely -hate- this ... having actual accountability AND having to pay higher wages.

2.) Doing what I wanted would require federal intervention, and the climate has not been ripe for new regulations, let alone governing bodies, in well over a decade.

Hell, I even tried to get my PE in Software, but right as I was going to start the process, the PE for Software was removed from my state (and isn't likely to ever come back).

I 100% agree we should have even a PE for Software, but it's not likely to happen any time soon because Software without accountability and regulation makes WAY too much money ... :(

The phone wasn't a household staple for pretty much the whole of humanity. It's really only been about a single generation (well, maybe 2 generations at this point) that the telephone to which you had to remember phone numbers was an important thing. Even in the early 1900's you would pick up the phone and an operator would answer and you had to ask them to connect you to a specific place/person.

And given that there 21 year olds alive today who never had a land-line (or even cable television) in their house or have even seen a dial phone, across the world, and that's only increased, it's not that surprising that we don't choose to actively remember phone numbers anymore .. it's just not "built in" to our core abilities yet because it was never something we needed to do on any type of evolutionary or generational scale.

I don't necessarily disagree that, on a whole, many people rely on technology so much that it has made them blind to the world around them (like so many who can't even read the map on their phone without blue lines telling them where to go). But I do think that not remembering every single phone number isn't something to really be concerned with at the human level .. not to say we shouldn't be teaching the importance of remembering certain numbers for emergency purposes though.

I agree it's wasteful, but from a long-form view of what spending looks like (or at least should/used to look like). Those who see 1.5k/month as "saving" money typically only care about next quarter.

As the old adage goes: a thousand dollars saved this month is 100 thousand spent next year.

I kid I kid ;) That's a commendable effort and nice job! Question though: was it an effort to make TacOS using DOOM as a "standard" or was it an effort to make an OS dedicated to running DOOM run from scratch?

And I don't ask from any place but actual curiosity. I made an absolute bare-bones-cant-do-anything-but-boot type OS way back "in the day" (like almost 30 years ago, ack!!!) just for my own education/fun, but the idea of having a dedicated OS that can basically only run DOOM, yet be ported to anything would just make the "can it run DOOM" meme so much more ironic and fun!

Nice stuff! Keep it up!!

Wanted to pass a secret code to a friend? Encode the bit-data in the alpha channel of an image. It could even be encrypted/scrambled within the image itself. Post the perfectly normal image to a public forum, ping your friend, they run it through the "decoder" and Robert's your mother's brother.

Of course these weren't "logic bombs" like this post is describing, but even those have been around for a while too.

Hacking is fun :)

I'm more saying we should cut out the middle-man (as it were).

The difference between C++03 and C++26 is, at a language/STL level, ultimately negligible when it comes to what I can "really do" with the language if I started in 03 .. and I don't mean that 26 doesn't "add more", but if I started with 03 and didn't have threading, file handling, delegates (std::function), sockets, graphics, and so much more, I'd likely use something that wrapped all of that (a plugin/component system) ... and switching away from that with an "antiquated" code base would be really hard at this point. Using 03 with a library and then just making it compile with C++26 doesn't really "add much", and switching away from that component system to C++26 requires design, building, testing, etc. etc. :|

And even if I'm starting with C++26 now (assuming my compilers are actually compliant, stable, non-breaking, ABI resilient and/or are actually available across the various platforms I want to target), while it does give me a lot more of a feature-set, how much of that is actually viable from an efficiency (CPU/memory) perspective over just proper/decent C++03/11 (I say 11 because of the threads) ...??

I know it's also up to the individual programmer using C++ to actually "do it good", so it's more just an old-man-yelling-at-clouds rant (observation) at how C++ is evolving, lol!

To be clear: not trying to be argumentative, I regularly work in C++ and enjoy it over many other languages .. just "saying" is all, hehe :)

And 100% out of scope of C++, like the std::thread?? I've worked on many an embedded system that has no concept of threads, yet the C++ committee decided to add the std::thread as a part of the STL in C++11 instead of agree on a standard ABI. So why not GUI's, or sockets, or any other more "common" modern idiom?

If you don't want to imagine what a GUI library designed by committee would look like, I'd argue what a language like C++ looks like designed by committee (6 versions in 10 years).

C# had it but it was also in part because it interop'd with .NET which had C++.NET, VB.NET, F#.NET, VBScript.NET, ASP.NET, Core.NET, Web.NET, Net.NET and so much more .. reflection was an "easy" way to have other dev's interact with each others code as a type of "contract".

I really like C# and what it can do, but having to check if a particular method exists within an external dependency is in part what lead to "dll-hell" .. it's the antithesis to an API and a "software contract" .. honestly it feels like C++26's "reflection" is more an answer to the ABI issue that has plagued C++ since its inception.

If C++ really wants to help "game-engines" or make actual strides, then it should add basic GUI support to the language itself. That'd kill off 90% of the other framework/libraries out there.

As with other parts of the language, you don't -have- to use it .. and since it's trying to be the next Java in it's eternal update path, why not add GUI support at a language level ??? Hell the std::thread just calls pthread_create or CreateThread under the hood anyways, just with a 15+ high stack frame .. why not add GUI!?

Most of the time when your stomach starts to "grumble" you might be surprised how often it's thirst and not hunger.

Personally I wake up and I feel "starving", but the reality is that I'm just really thirsty because I haven't had any water for 6-8 hours.

You can go weeks without food, but typically can only last a day or two at a absolute maximum without water.